We performed a comparison between Codebeamer and Rally Software based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The platform provided the flexibility to expand our business processes, accommodating or altering them to suit the requirements of a changing environment."
"There is a lot of complexity involved, meaning it can do many things, which can be quite useful."
"CodeBeamer provides full traceability, excellent collaboration, regulatory compliance, and instant reporting with its holistic approach from requirement management to testing."
"One of the most valuable features of Codebeamer is its strong performance."
"The solution easily replaces IBM DOORS, which no longer offers maintenance in China."
"You can track the metrics in the Agile dashboard very easily."
"Codebeamer's API-based integration and many other integration aspects with other solutions are very powerful."
"It is a stable solution."
"Agile Central allows us to log one hundred percent of the work we do and it allows for no hidden work, so teams can't go under the radar with what they're working on."
"The reporting, and being able to roll that up across the verticals, was an important selling point for us."
"Its ability to scale."
"It helps with getting the alignment between strategy and execution for the product teams, all the way down to the delivery teams."
"Rally Software provides the capability to accurately estimate the time required for building large software projects, which can be challenging to predict...Rally Software enables us to schedule tasks better, allocate resources, and meet project deadlines."
"The configurable Portfolio Management and parent-child relationships."
"When we went into Scaled Agile Framework, we could not have done it without the use of Agile Central. It allows us to scale our Scrum teams, and it also enables us when we do our remote big room plannings."
"I was able to create epics for our budgeting concerns and it helped me link everything together."
"The search and replace feature within the tool itself could be improved."
"I would like to see more, easily trackable reports."
"We would like to see more industry-specific features that are tailored to the vertical markets."
"It would be helpful if Codebeamer's overall processing and integration with software like Jira could be improved."
"It's still a fairly new tool that lacks maturity right now."
"Usability needs to be improved."
"During migrations from other platforms to CodeBeamer, there have been instances where we encountered issues that required redoing certain tasks."
"The solution has a very small market share in China. It's almost like a startup."
"Customization features may not be exposed or unavailable, so people may be looking for them. So, customization is an area people have told me is more desirable."
"One problem I see is that if there is a dependent user story - for example, if my team is working on one thing and there is a dependent user story from another team - we can have a dependency created but we don't know if there is a change of status from the other team. That is something which is very important for Agile Central to look into so that if the other team makes any changes we will be notified as well."
"The navigation within the tool sometimes is a little tricky for me. I'm sure with more use, more practice, I'll become accustomed to it, but some of the things just aren't intuitive."
"I think the interface could be a little bit more visual and less wordy. Right now, it seems like it's just a lot of text on the page. In other ticketing systems where it's more visual, you can see more of a flow. But in this one it's more just a list of tasks. I would like to see that a little bit better, especially considering it has so many great organizational features, like child tasks, different artifacts. It would be great to see it presented more appropriately."
"I'd like the ability to customize reports without having to incur Professional Services, or having to write my own code GitHub and then implement that as a custom report. That's untenable. It's not sustainable."
"I would like for workspace admins to be able to hide projects in the Project Picker and not lose any historical data; make them invisible to certain users, visible to certain users, depending on permission sets. That would be lovely."
"As it is right now, it does not support automation of the quality assurance process. It just supports manual testing."
"The stronger CA can get on dependency mapping the better. That's the biggest hiccup. As you're setting up your features, they should make it easier to flag the dependencies, either across features or across projects. Then you're more set up for success."
Codebeamer is ranked 9th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 10 reviews while Rally Software is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 116 reviews. Codebeamer is rated 7.8, while Rally Software is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Codebeamer writes "Has good technical support services, but the migration process needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rally Software writes "Good discussion and note-taking capabilities but hard to track the changes". Codebeamer is most compared with PTC Integrity, Polarion ALM, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Jira, whereas Rally Software is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, TFS and Jira Align. See our Codebeamer vs. Rally Software report.
See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors.
We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
